Jason A. Bryan

The influence of three-dimensional computed tomography images of the shoulder in preoperative planning for total shoulder arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND Arthritic changes to glenoid morphology can be difficult to fully characterize on both plain radiographs and conventional two-dimensional computer tomography images. We tested the hypothesis that three-dimensional imaging of the shoulder would increase inter-rater agreement for assessing the extent and location of glenoid bone loss and also would improve surgical planning for total shoulder arthroplasty. METHODS Four shoulder surgeons independently and retrospectively reviewed the preoperative computed tomography scans of twenty-four arthritic shoulders. The blinded images were evaluated with conventional two-dimensional imaging software and then later with novel three-dimensional imaging software. Measurements and preoperative judgments were made for each shoulder with use of each imaging modality and then were compared. The glenoid measurements were glenoid version and bone loss. The judgments were the zone of maximum glenoid bone loss, glenoid implant fit within the glenoid vault, and how to surgically address abnormal glenoid version and bone loss. Agreement between observers was evaluated with use of intraclass correlation coefficients and the weighted kappa coefficient (kappa), and we determined if surgical decisions changed with use of the three-dimensional data. RESULTS The average glenoid version (and standard deviation) measured -17 degrees +/- 2.2 degrees on the two-dimensional images and -19 degrees +/- 2.4 degrees on the three-dimensional images (p < 0.05). The average posterior glenoid bone loss measured 9 +/- 2.3 mm on the two-dimensional images and 7 +/- 2 mm on the three-dimensional images (p < 0.05). The average anterior bone loss measured 1 mm on both the two-dimensional and the three-dimensional images. However, the intraclass correlation coefficients for anterior bone loss increased significantly with use of the three-dimensional data (from 0.36 to 0.70; p < 0.05). Observers were more likely to locate mid-anterior glenoid bone loss on the basis of the three-dimensional data (p < 0.05). The use of three-dimensional data provided greater agreement among observers with regard to the zone of glenoid bone loss, glenoid prosthetic fit, and surgical decision-making. Also, when the judgment of implant fit changed, observers more often determined that it would violate the vault walls on the basis of the three-dimensional data (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS The use of three-dimensional imaging can increase inter-rater agreement for the analysis of glenoid morphology and preoperative planning. Important considerations such as the extent and location of glenoid bone loss and the likelihood of implant fit were influenced by the three-dimensional data.

Comparison of patient-specific instruments with standard surgical instruments in determining glenoid component position: a randomized prospective clinical trial.

BACKGROUND Glenoid component malposition for anatomic shoulder replacement may result in complications. The purpose of this study was to define the efficacy of a new surgical method to place the glenoid component. METHODS Thirty-one patients were randomized for glenoid component placement with use of either novel three-dimensional computed tomographic scan planning software combined with patient-specific instrumentation (the glenoid positioning system group), or conventional computed tomographic scan, preoperative planning, and surgical technique, utilizing instruments provided by the implant manufacturer (the standard surgical group). The desired position of the component was determined preoperatively. Postoperatively, a computed tomographic scan was used to define and compare the actual implant location with the preoperative plan. RESULTS In the standard surgical group, the average preoperative glenoid retroversion was -11.3° (range, -39° to 17°). In the glenoid positioning system group, the average glenoid retroversion was -14.8° (range, -27° to 7°). When the standard surgical group was compared with the glenoid positioning system group, patient-specific instrumentation technology significantly decreased (p < 0.05) the average deviation of implant position for inclination and medial-lateral offset. Overall, the average deviation in version was 6.9° in the standard surgical group and 4.3° in the glenoid positioning system group. The average deviation in inclination was 11.6° in the standard surgical group and 2.9° in the glenoid positioning system group. The greatest benefit of patient-specific instrumentation was observed in patients with retroversion in excess of 16°; the average deviation was 10° in the standard surgical group and 1.2° in the glenoid positioning system group (p < 0.001). Preoperative planning and patient-specific instrumentation use resulted in a significant improvement in the selection and use of the optimal type of implant and a significant reduction in the frequency of malpositioned glenoid implants. CONCLUSIONS Novel three-dimensional preoperative planning, coupled with patient and implant-specific instrumentation, allows the surgeon to better define the preoperative pathology, select the optimal implant design and location, and then accurately execute the plan at the time of surgery.

Effect of glenoid deformity on glenoid component placement in primary shoulder arthroplasty

BACKGROUND Malposition of the glenoid component can result in premature component loosening or instability. This study was designed to test the ability of an experienced shoulder surgeon to position the glenoid component using standard preoperative planning and surgical bone preparation. MATERIALS AND METHODS Thirteen patients having primary total shoulder arthroplasty were evaluated using 3-dimensional surgical simulator. Ideal version was considered to have version as close to perpendicular to the plane of the scapula, with complete contact of the back side of the component on glenoid bone and maintenance of the center peg of the component within bone. RESULTS The average retroversion angle was 13° (mean, standard deviation [SD] 12°), with a range of 1-42°. In 7 of these 13 cases, preoperative glenoid retroversion was greater or equal to 10°. In 3 cases, the component was malpositioned with greater than 10° of ideal version. In cases with less than 10° of preoperative retroversion, the glenoid component was placed within 10° of ideal version in all cases. CONCLUSION Traditional methods to correct moderate to severe glenoid deformity and place the glenoid component within 5° of the ideal position are not consistent. Optimal glenoid component placement can be achieved when there is minimal bone deformity. Retroversion greater or equal to 20° makes it difficult to place a pegged glenoid component perpendicular to the plane of the scapula by asymmetric reaming without center peg perforation.

The three-dimensional glenoid vault model can estimate normal glenoid version in osteoarthritis.

Glenohumeral arthroplasty can involve correcting pathologic glenoid tilt or version. Predicting the physiologic glenoid version for a particular individual can be difficult. We propose using a previously validated, 3-dimensional, glenoid vault model as a template to predict normal glenoid version. Computed tomography scans of both shoulders were obtained in 14 subjects with unilateral glenohumeral osteoarthritis. Custom-developed graphic software was used to create a 3-D reconstruction of each scapula. Within the software, the vault model was placed in a best-fit orientation into each glenoid vault independently by 3 observers who were blinded to the contralateral scapula. Measurement differences between the glenoid and vault model were analyzed by repeated-measures analysis of variance. Standard errors of measurement (SEM) were calculated. Interobserver and intraobserver reliabilities were assessed. The healthy glenoid version averaged -7.0 degrees (SEM, 0.7 degrees ; range, 0 degrees to -14 degrees ). The arthritic glenoid version averaged -15.6 degrees (SEM, 0.7 degrees ; range, 1 degrees to -33 degrees ; P < .0001). The version of the implanted vault model measured -7.1 degrees (SEM, 0.7 degrees ; range, -1 degrees to -15 degrees ) on the healthy side and -7.2 degrees (SEM, 0.7 degrees ; range -2 degrees to -11 degrees ) on the arthritic side. Measurements between observers were not significantly different (P = .98). Interobserver and intraobserver correlation coefficients were 0.79 (P < .001) and 0.80 (P < .001). In the arthritic glenoid, the vault model reproducibly closely approximated the version of the normal contralateral glenoid, -7.2 degrees vs -7.0 degrees (P = .99) and is a novel and accurate method of estimating the normal glenoid version. This technique may be valuable in correcting pathologic glenoid version due to arthritis.

Quantitative analysis of glenoid bone loss in osteoarthritis using three-dimensional computed tomography scans

The 3-dimensional (3D) shape of the glenoid vault has been defined previously and shown to be a complex, yet consistent, shape in individuals without glenoid pathology. We proposed assessing whether this conserved shape could be used as a template to measure glenoid bone loss in subjects with glenohumeral osteoarthritis. Computed tomography (CT) scans of both shoulders were obtained from 12 subjects with unilateral glenohumeral osteoarthritis. The paired scapulae were reconstructed 3-dimensionally, using a previously developed graphic software package. Two methods of estimating glenoid bone loss were performed. First, using the software, a stereolithography model of the standardized vault shape was implanted into each glenoid and measurements made of the volume of the implant not contained within each vault. Second, direct measurements of the paired glenoid vault volumes were performed. The volume of the nonarthritic glenoid was used as a subject-specific template for normal glenoid vault volume for each pair. The glenoid bone volumes measured by each method were compared and Pearsons correlation coefficient determined. The average measurement of glenoid bone loss using the vault implant was within 0.8% (SD +/- 1.5%) of the measurement made using the contralateral, normal glenoid. For all patients, Pearsons correlation coefficient was .99, indicating a very high correlation between the two methods of measuring bone loss (P < .0001). The intricate, yet consistent 3D shape of the glenoid vault can be used as an accurate and reliable template to measure glenoid bone loss in glenohumeral osteoarthritis.

Effect of a Variable Prosthetic Neck-Shaft Angle and the Surgical Technique on Replication of Normal Humeral Anatomy

BACKGROUND Replicating the normal anatomy of the shoulder is an important principle in the design of prosthetic devices and the development of surgical techniques. In this study, we used a three-dimensional surgical simulation to compare the abilities of an adjustable neck-shaft angle prosthesis and a fixed neck-shaft angle prosthesis to restore the normal geometry of the proximal part of the humerus. METHODS A total of 2058 cadaveric humeri were measured to define the normal distribution of neck-shaft angles. Thirty-six humeri were selected to represent a wide variation in neck-shaft angles, and computed tomographic scans with three-dimensional reconstruction were made of these specimens. With use of a three-dimensional computer surgical simulator, the humeral head was then cut at the anatomic neck to replicate a normal neck-shaft angle and version or it was cut at a fixed 135 degrees angle with anatomic version. The anatomy of an adjustable-angle prosthesis and that of a fixed-angle prosthesis of the same design were both compared with native humeral anatomy in three dimensions. RESULTS The average neck-shaft angle of the 2058 humeri was 134.7 degrees (range, 115 degrees to 148 degrees), and the angle was between 130 degrees and 140 degrees in 77.84% of the humeri. In the setting of a high varus or valgus neck-shaft angle, an adjustable-angle prosthesis allowed optimal reconstruction when the humeral head was cut along the anatomic neck and allowed a standard and consistent surgical technique with use of anatomic landmarks. A fixed-angle prosthesis also replicated the anatomic center of rotation, tuberosity-head height, and head volume if the surgical procedure was altered to adapt to variations in humeral anatomy. There was no significant difference in anatomic parameters between the two types of prostheses, except that in all cases the head thickness was decreased when a fixed-135 degrees-angle prosthesis was used in a humerus with a high valgus or high varus neck-shaft angle, resulting in a smaller articular arc and percent articular surface match. CONCLUSIONS This study demonstrates the ability of both an adjustable and a fixed neck-shaft angle prosthesis to replicate humeral anatomy. However, the fixed-angle device requires specific modifications of the surgical technique to accommodate the specific prosthetic design and optimize the surgeons ability to replicate normal anatomic parameters in humeri with an extreme neck-shaft angle.

Relationship Between Humeral Torsion and Injury in Professional Baseball Pitchers

Background: High levels of humeral torsion allow baseball pitchers to achieve maximum external rotation in the late cocking phase of pitching with lower twisting and shear forces on the long head of the biceps tendon and rotator cuff tendons. Hypothesis: Humeral torsion is inversely related to the incidence and severity of shoulder injuries and other upper extremity injuries in professional baseball pitchers. Study Design: Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: A total of 25 professional pitchers from a single Major League Baseball organization were prospectively recruited into this study. Computed tomography (CT) was performed on dominant and nondominant humeri, and image data were processed with a 3-dimensional volume-rendering postprocessing program. The software program was then modified to model a simplified throwing motion and to measure potential internal impingement distances in a small subset of players. Players were followed for 2 years after CT, and the number of days missed from pitching activities was recorded as a measure of injury severity and incidence. Results: The mean dominant humeral torsion was 38.5° ± 8.9°; the mean nondominant humeral torsion was 27.6° ± 8.0°. The difference between dominant and nondominant torsions was significant (P < .0001). Among the 11 pitchers (44%) injured during follow-up, 5 players had shoulder injuries, 7 had elbow injuries, and 2 had finger injuries. Dominant humeral torsion was a statistically significant predictor of severe injuries (≥30 days; P = .048) but not of milder injuries. Among injured players, higher numbers of days missed because of injury were strongly correlated with lower degrees of dominant humeral torsion (r = −0.78; P = .005) and smaller differences between dominant and nondominant humeral torsions (r = −0.59; P = .055). There was no significant association between the incidence of shoulder injury and minimum glenoid-tuberosity distance in the dominant or nondominant shoulder or degree of dominant glenoid version. Conclusion: A strong relationship was found between lower degrees of dominant humeral torsion and more severe upper extremity injuries as well as a trend relating lower side-to-side differences in torsion with more severe dominant upper extremity injuries. In addition, there was a higher incidence of severe injuries in players with lower degrees of dominant torsion. If future studies confirm these results, humeral torsion measurements could play a role in risk assessment in pitchers.

Three-dimensional preoperative planning software and a novel information transfer technology improve glenoid component positioning.

BACKGROUND We hypothesized that a novel surgical method, in which three-dimensional (3-D) preoperative planning software is generated to create a patient-specific surgical model that is used with a reusable and adjustable tool, could substantially improve the positioning accuracy of the glenoid guide pin used in total shoulder arthroplasty. We tested this method using bone models from patients with shoulder pathology and compared the results with those achieved using surgical methods representing the current standard of care. METHODS Three surgeons with a variety of surgical experience placed a guide pin in nine bone models from patients with a variety of glenohumeral arthritis severity using (1) standard instrumentation alone, (2) standard instrumentation and 3-D preoperative surgical planning, and (3) the reusable transfer device and 3-D preoperative surgical planning. A postoperative 3-D computed tomography scan of the bone model was made and registered to the preoperative plan, and the differences between the actual and planned pin locations and trajectories were measured. RESULTS Use of the standard instrumentation combined with 3-D preoperative planning software improved guide pin positioning compared with standard instrumentation and preoperative planning using 2-D imaging. The accuracy of pin positioning increased by 4.5° ± 1.0° in version (p < 0.001), 3.3° ± 1.3° in inclination (p = 0.013), and 0.4 ± 0.2 mm in location (p = 0.042). Use of the adjustable and reusable device and the 3-D software improved pin positioning by a further 3.7° ± 0.9° in version, 8.1° ± 1.2° in inclination, and 1.2 ± 0.2 mm in location (p < 0.001 for all) compared with standard instrumentation and the 3-D software; the improvement compared with use of standard instrumentation with 2-D imaging was 8.2° ± 0.9° in version, 11.4° ± 1.2° in inclination, and 1.7 ± 0.2 mm in location (p < 0.001 for all). CONCLUSIONS Use of 3-D preoperative planning and use of the patient-specific bone model and transfer device both improved the positioning accuracy of the pin used to guide placement of the glenoid component in total shoulder arthroplasty. CLINICAL RELEVANCE Proper positioning of the glenoid component would be expected to improve the function and durability of the joint replacement.

The effect of oxygen tension on the in vitro assay of human osteoblastic connective tissue progenitor cells.

Connective tissue progenitors (CTPs) are defined as the heterogeneous set of stem and progenitor cells that reside in native tissues and are capable of proliferation and differentiation into one or more connective tissue phenotypes. CTPs play important roles in tissue formation, repair, and remodeling. Therefore, in vitro assays of CTP prevalence and biological potential have important scientific and clinical relevance. This study evaluated oxygen tension as an important variable in optimizing in vitro conditions for quantitative assays of human CTPs. Bone marrow aspirates were collected from 20 human subjects and cultured using established medium conditions at ambient oxygen tensions of 1, 5, 10, and 20%. Colony‐forming efficiency (CFE), proliferation, and colony density were assessed. CFE and proliferation were greatest at 5% O2. Traditional conditions using atmospheric oxygen tension (20% O2) reduced CFE by as much as 32%. CFE and proliferation at 1% O2 were less than 5% O2 but comparable to that seen at 20% O2, suggesting that CTPs are relatively resilient under hypoxic conditions, a fact that may be relevant to their function in wound repair and their potential use in tissue engineering applications involving transplantation into settings of moderate to severe hypoxia. These data demonstrate that optimization of quantitative assays for CTPs will require control of oxygen tension.

Comparison of Acetabular Shell Position Using Patient Specific Instruments vs. Standard Surgical Instruments: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Total hip arthroplasty (THA) survivorship relies largely upon appropriate acetabular cup placement. The purpose of this prospective randomized controlled trial was to determine whether the use of a preoperative 3D planning software in combination with patient specific instrumentation (PSI) results in improved cup placement compared with traditional techniques. Thirty-six THA patients were randomized into standard (STD) or PSI technique. Standard approach was completed using traditional techniques, while PSI cases were planned and customized surgical instruments were manufactured. Postoperative CT scans were used to compare planned to actual results. Differences found between planned and actual anteversion were -0.2° ± 6.9° (PSI) and -6.9°±8.9° (STD) (P = 0.018). Use of 3D preoperative planning along with PSIs resulted in significantly greater anteversion accuracy than traditional planning and instrumentation.